Mark my words: if he ends up having a fair trial in Sweden and gets prosecuted via Swedish law for the crimes leveled against him, then serves whatever sentence he receives and goes on his way, I'll eat my netbook. All those of you considering *any* of the allegations made by these young women to be true, watch. Watch what happens the moment he sets foot in Sweden. Just watch. I *dare* you. The U.S. wants him and this is how they're going about getting him.
Can we stop pretending that his legal charges have anything to do with rape? It was evident from the getgo that the whole situation in Sweden was a farce and a naked attempt to smear his good name sufficiently that he could be whisked to the U.S. and waterboarded. Let's also stop pretending that his Swiss bank account was closed due to addressing issues or that Paypal, Visa and Mastercard all refuse to process donations for him because... well, they never really did supply reasons for their behavior, did they?
I'd say they are likely based on the fact that there is no specific standout feature, no thing that says to the average end user 'this is why we are better than the competition, choose us over the existing products'.
Ubuntu's standout feature, IMO, is that it's not incumbent Xoogle, Ycrosoft or Zapple;)
... as being the litigious laughingstock of the rest of the world. The U.S. is lucky it's still rich enough, for now, that it can afford to let armies of bloodsucking lawyers and lobbyists sap innovation from key industries. How long can that be sustained? Free-market capitalist democracy - what a load of tripe.
Gotta love all the "it'll never have market share comparable to current incumbent x, y or z" comments. You obviously haven't been following the last 20 years' worth of developments in the software industry.
Reverse engineering is innovation? Okay so when China outstrips the United States and defeats the evil Western corporations, who then will they turn to for reverse engineering targets? Also, what is driving this chip to innovate? Who are the competitors for Loongson/Godson? Nobody inside their borders, the government is funding that! That's the problem when your government pays for and decides what you're going to use. Once that's in place, you can sit back and soak up that fat federal funding. Where's the competition going to come from?
Of course nothing happens in a vacuum. Blah blah blah. Let's avoid ALSO slipping into a capitalist vs. communist ideological catfight here. We're talking about processors. First of all, I think it's naive to assume that China will continue to feel that copying is good enough. If supremacy is their agenda, as you seem to be suggesting, surely they'll attempt to take what they learn and run with it in as soon as they are capable. Japan started by imitating US tech, and look what they've done with it (and what the US has done with its own tech in the meantime:/ ). Taking them as an example, I find your argument re: market competition ironic - while U.S. manufacturing giants like GMC ask for bailouts (who's supping from the teat of government funding?) and stagnate in providing any real innovation, Asian products dominate the U.S. market. The assertion that free market capitalism is at the root of U.S. tech innovation is laughable - U.S. corporations are more interested in profit than innovation, and are bleeding incentives away from their home turf because they can pay less for it in the East. The main reason the U.S. is still on top of the high tech market is that it's a young technology, birthed from the military industrial complex (and how much public funding has gone into that over the last 60 years? Fat government funding indeed. Give me a break). Give it another 20-30 years and we'll see whose economic practices allow for innovation in the global tech industry.
Microsoft paid FAR too much for skype for them to stop wasting time, effort and more money on it now. Woe betide ye, FOSS clones...
Time to look into this Google videoconferencing stuff.
A new study shows correlation between a few isolated test parameters and a few isolated end results! Well done, behavioral science, for ignoring the fascinatingly complex interpersonal, existential web that is human life!
I think we'll find in the coming decades how sorely the U.S. population will end up paying for all the privatization and deregulation we've allowed to occur. Private corporations are fine with socialist government subsidies, but don't seem to want socialist government regulations after receiving that money. It's a sick, sick system perpetuated from bottom to top (with average U.S. citizens basically fighting for the rights of the rich to exploit them) under some auspice of fair Capitalist idealism. We're headed towards making a first-world GNP with a second-world standard of living.
This infrastructure is aging and obsoleting, but it is still usable. In the rest of the world, investments have been far more recent (mostly in the 90s), hence better and more recent technology.
This. The more recently a country has updated their infrastructure, the more likely it is to be zippy. I think that accounts for a lot of the discrepancy. This does NOT, however, end the discussion. What are America's current telecom corporations doing to stay relevant? When they expand to new areas, are they using contemporary tech? I'd love to see a rundown of numbers like this.
Exactly. Unfortunately, U.S. presidents don't seem to come with cojones included these days. And Obama in particular must be keenly aware that the grassy knoll awaits if decides to hero up at all. I think the establishment has decided that he's already stirred things up enough just by winning the presidency, being non-white (gasp!) and suggesting change to win votes. The day I discover him effecting any genuine change in American politics will be the day I eat my fedora.
In regards to this particular story, I think he's just proving again that although his platform was supported by the hip and sexy notion of online grassroots activism and all his glossy IT infrastructure ostentation, neither he nor anybody else in Washington seems to understand a damn thing about "this internet phenomenon". Washington may have invested in some new computers, but they're still dragging their heels if they feel they're getting anywhere by hiring a RIAA lapdog.
Slashdot Mirror
Mark my words: if he ends up having a fair trial in Sweden and gets prosecuted via Swedish law for the crimes leveled against him, then serves whatever sentence he receives and goes on his way, I'll eat my netbook. All those of you considering *any* of the allegations made by these young women to be true, watch. Watch what happens the moment he sets foot in Sweden. Just watch. I *dare* you. The U.S. wants him and this is how they're going about getting him.
Can we stop pretending that his legal charges have anything to do with rape? It was evident from the getgo that the whole situation in Sweden was a farce and a naked attempt to smear his good name sufficiently that he could be whisked to the U.S. and waterboarded. Let's also stop pretending that his Swiss bank account was closed due to addressing issues or that Paypal, Visa and Mastercard all refuse to process donations for him because... well, they never really did supply reasons for their behavior, did they?
I'd say they are likely based on the fact that there is no specific standout feature, no thing that says to the average end user 'this is why we are better than the competition, choose us over the existing products'.
Ubuntu's standout feature, IMO, is that it's not incumbent Xoogle, Ycrosoft or Zapple ;)
Did P.J. O'Rourke have a corresponding snappy witticism for an unregulated market?
They're working the obsolescence angle. Nobody remembers how to compromise security on any OSS that old.
Did he just play the terrorism card? Oh no he didn't!
... as being the litigious laughingstock of the rest of the world. The U.S. is lucky it's still rich enough, for now, that it can afford to let armies of bloodsucking lawyers and lobbyists sap innovation from key industries. How long can that be sustained? Free-market capitalist democracy - what a load of tripe.
Gotta love all the "it'll never have market share comparable to current incumbent x, y or z" comments. You obviously haven't been following the last 20 years' worth of developments in the software industry.
Reverse engineering is innovation? Okay so when China outstrips the United States and defeats the evil Western corporations, who then will they turn to for reverse engineering targets? Also, what is driving this chip to innovate? Who are the competitors for Loongson/Godson? Nobody inside their borders, the government is funding that! That's the problem when your government pays for and decides what you're going to use. Once that's in place, you can sit back and soak up that fat federal funding. Where's the competition going to come from?
Of course nothing happens in a vacuum. Blah blah blah. Let's avoid ALSO slipping into a capitalist vs. communist ideological catfight here. We're talking about processors. First of all, I think it's naive to assume that China will continue to feel that copying is good enough. If supremacy is their agenda, as you seem to be suggesting, surely they'll attempt to take what they learn and run with it in as soon as they are capable. Japan started by imitating US tech, and look what they've done with it (and what the US has done with its own tech in the meantime :/ ). Taking them as an example, I find your argument re: market competition ironic - while U.S. manufacturing giants like GMC ask for bailouts (who's supping from the teat of government funding?) and stagnate in providing any real innovation, Asian products dominate the U.S. market. The assertion that free market capitalism is at the root of U.S. tech innovation is laughable - U.S. corporations are more interested in profit than innovation, and are bleeding incentives away from their home turf because they can pay less for it in the East. The main reason the U.S. is still on top of the high tech market is that it's a young technology, birthed from the military industrial complex (and how much public funding has gone into that over the last 60 years? Fat government funding indeed. Give me a break). Give it another 20-30 years and we'll see whose economic practices allow for innovation in the global tech industry.
Microsoft paid FAR too much for skype for them to stop wasting time, effort and more money on it now. Woe betide ye, FOSS clones... Time to look into this Google videoconferencing stuff.
Oh, the irony of this statement!
That's the richest comment I've read on Slashdot in a long time. Hooh, boy.
A new study shows correlation between a few isolated test parameters and a few isolated end results! Well done, behavioral science, for ignoring the fascinatingly complex interpersonal, existential web that is human life!
Ford and Microsoft teaming up? Now there's a shudder-worthy proposition.
Oh, ok, well that makes it all good, then! Thanks for those helpful tips.
I think we'll find in the coming decades how sorely the U.S. population will end up paying for all the privatization and deregulation we've allowed to occur. Private corporations are fine with socialist government subsidies, but don't seem to want socialist government regulations after receiving that money. It's a sick, sick system perpetuated from bottom to top (with average U.S. citizens basically fighting for the rights of the rich to exploit them) under some auspice of fair Capitalist idealism. We're headed towards making a first-world GNP with a second-world standard of living.
This. The more recently a country has updated their infrastructure, the more likely it is to be zippy. I think that accounts for a lot of the discrepancy. This does NOT, however, end the discussion. What are America's current telecom corporations doing to stay relevant? When they expand to new areas, are they using contemporary tech? I'd love to see a rundown of numbers like this.
Exactly. Unfortunately, U.S. presidents don't seem to come with cojones included these days. And Obama in particular must be keenly aware that the grassy knoll awaits if decides to hero up at all. I think the establishment has decided that he's already stirred things up enough just by winning the presidency, being non-white (gasp!) and suggesting change to win votes. The day I discover him effecting any genuine change in American politics will be the day I eat my fedora. In regards to this particular story, I think he's just proving again that although his platform was supported by the hip and sexy notion of online grassroots activism and all his glossy IT infrastructure ostentation, neither he nor anybody else in Washington seems to understand a damn thing about "this internet phenomenon". Washington may have invested in some new computers, but they're still dragging their heels if they feel they're getting anywhere by hiring a RIAA lapdog.